Note: repealing the second amendment doesn’t necessarily mean confiscating everyone’s guns. Other nations have guns in private hands without having an undeniable right to them. The only effect of the second amendment, as least as the most recent Supreme Court decision would have it, is to prevent us from regulating them. As the last few years have proven, regulation is desperately needed. If the second amendment is in the way of that, it needs to go.

Because I keep seeing people get caught up in counterproductive arguements. WHAT ABOUT THE TERRORIST WATCH LIST or BAN [SPECIFIC GUN] are easy to type on the internet, but it’s a bullshit way to conduct public pressure for legislative change. The Terrorist Watch List should be no one’s go-to policy choice, at least until the government is willing to be clear about how people get on it, and until they work out a system that will let people get their names taken off.

And arguing about this or that specific gun/type of gun is a mug’s game. People who oppose gun control love this argument, because it becomes all about semantics and petty details. What counts as an “assault” rifle? What about this or that type of gun? And then, every tiny error about terminology or technical specs becomes evidence that no one but the most avid gun fans can’t be trusted to speak knowledgeably about gun control.

Frankly, we already have the evidence we need to show that lots of guns lead to lots of tragic death–all we have to do is look at the rest of the world–but turning the CDC loose on the problem seems to be a necessary prerequisite to getting sensible legislation.